Findings of Fact

1. CalAm and ORA have filed a motion to adopt an amended, partial settlement agreement.

2. The settlement outlines and explains the areas where CalAm and ORA reached agreement through the settlement; it does not address those accounts and issues for which there were no differences in CalAm's and ORA initial showings.

3. No party filed and served comments contesting the settlement as they were required to do by our Rules of Practice and Procedure, Rule 51.4, if they desired to contest the settlement.

4. Santa Cruz objected on brief to CalAm's foregoing any opportunity to recover 10% of any proven Citizens acquisition synergies savings in exchange for not having to demonstrate those savings in future rate cases. The CalAm and ORA common position on this issue is not included in the settlement.

5. The record in this proceeding provides sufficient information to permit the Commission to discharge its future regulatory obligations with respect to the parties and their interests.

6. No provision of the settlement is in violation of any statute or Commission decision or rule.

7. The adopted summaries of earnings presented in Appendix A, and the adopted quantities and calculations included as Appendix D which underlie them, are reasonable for ratemaking purposes.

8. The capital structure, cost of debt, rate of return on equity, and rate of return on rate base shown in Table 3 are reasonable for ratemaking.

9. Some of the parties in A.00-05-015 may not have received notice of this proceeding or the proposal to revise the Citizens synergies sharing method established in D.01-09-057.

10. The RWE acquisition occurred too late to be properly reflected in this proceeding. Provisions ordered in D.02-12-068 will nonetheless secure for CalAm's ratepayers the benefits from the transaction, including those immediate benefits which most concern Santa Cruz and ORA here.

11. CalAm's showing to support recovery of amounts recorded in Citizens' Sacramento district water contamination litigation memorandum account does not meet the standard required by Resolutions W-4089 and W-4094.

12. The rate increases and rate levels that our adopted revenue requirement would produce for the Felton District may lead to "rate shock" for Felton ratepayers.

13. The record in this proceeding does not support a finding that the advantages of consolidating any set of CalAm's districts outweigh the disadvantages.

14. The TY2003 rates and the TY2004 step increases in Appendices B and C have been designed to produce revenues consistent with the summaries of earnings adopted in this order.